JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Friday, May 2, 2025

Jack Crossing: From corridor to Caroni

by

20120327

Austin "Jack" Warn­er has made the cross­ing over the po­lit­i­cal, eth­nic, racial and ge­o­graph­ic Ru­bi­con-from the east-west cor­ri­dor to Ca­roni-and has done so in spec­tac­u­lar fash­ion. With­out the en­dorse­ment of the hi­er­ar­chy of the Unit­ed Na­tion­al Con­gress, in­deed, against its wish­es, Warn­er saun­tered in­to the heart­land of the UNC to cap­ture the chair­man­ship of the par­ty and by an ex­tra­or­di­nar­i­ly wide mar­gin-12,695 to 656 votes.

Warn­er has made the po­lit­i­cal cross­ing on his own steam and this is un­like on the two oc­ca­sions when he won the Ch­agua­nas West con­stituen­cy and the chair­man­ship (once) un­der the spon­sor­ship of Pan­day and Per­sad-Bisses­sar. On the week­end, he de­fied the po­lit­i­cal di­rec­torate and its ob­vi­ous can­di­date, Ash­vani Ma­habir (who was re­al­ly a po­lit­i­cal pawn) and cap­tured the sup­port of the vot­ing UNC mem­ber­ship, as he boast­ed dur­ing the cam­paign he would do.

The hi­er­ar­chy could not have owned-up to sup­port­ing Ma­habir as de­feat would have re­flect­ed di­rect­ly and neg­a­tive­ly on it, in­clu­sive of the po­lit­i­cal leader, Prime Min­is­ter Per­sad-Bisses­sar. More­over, to give sup­port to Ma­habir would have made Neemakarams out of the po­lit­i­cal leader and the Na­tion­al­ists for op­pos­ing the man who more than any sin­gle in­di­vid­ual was re­spon­si­ble for the par­ty and the coali­tion suc­cess­ful­ly com­ing to­geth­er in 2010. To have turned back on Jack would have had neg­a­tive con­se­quences with­in the UNC and coali­tion.

How­ev­er, the point needs to be made that Warn­er has not slain the drag­on of race, just made some space for him­self. Ques­tion is though: what are the fac­tors that al­lowed Warn­er, a high­ly con­tro­ver­sial fig­ure lo­cal­ly and in­ter­na­tion­al­ly, to make such a break­through in a T&T po­lit­i­cal cul­ture that is solid­ly ground­ed in race, eth­nic­i­ty, even in ge­og­ra­phy?

First, Jack Warn­er has shown him­self to be the kind of peo­ple's rep­re­sen­ta­tive that in­di­vid­ual and na­tion­al con­stituen­cies al­ways hope they would have. In­side and out­side of elec­tion­eer­ing sea­sons, Warn­er has demon­strat­ed deep in­ter­est in the wel­fare of peo­ple; his sup­port­ers vot­ed for him in a man­ner that says they are sure that he has brought en­hance­ment to their lives.

It must al­so mean some­thing to his sup­port­ers that Warn­er has stood with them in the face of at times hos­tile com­ment and ac­tion from what in po­lit­i­cal terms would be de­scribed as his "nat­ur­al con­stituen­cy," that of Afro-Tri­ni-dad, among whom would be those who be­lieve that he had no busi­ness be­ing so im­mersed in the In­do-Trinidad com­mu­ni­ty.

His demon­strat­ed loy­al­ty to the UNC, notwith­stand­ing the very open con­flict he has had with the hi­er­ar­chy of the par­ty and Gov­ern­ment, has been tak­en as his in­ten­tion to save the par­ty and Gov- ern­ment from frac­tur­ing along its po­lit­i­cal fault lines. Be­yond those very prac­ti­cal acts of car­ing and as­sis­tance, Warn­er's back­ing of Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar to suc­cess­ful­ly oust Pan­day from the lead­er­ship of the UNC and to even­tu­al­ly cap­ture the 2010 gen­er­al elec­tion and re­trieve the par­ty from an­oth­er long stint in op­po­si­tion, is re­mem­bered in the UNC com­mu­ni­ty.

Dur­ing the cam­paign Warn­er con­stant­ly re­mind­ed his sup­port­ers and oth­ers of that con­tri­bu­tion to the UNC and PP Gov­ern­ment. Very sig­nif­i­cant­ly, too, the UNC vot­ers sep­a­rat­ed their re­li­gious be­liefs and prac­tices from their pol­i­tics and ig­nored com­plete­ly the at­tempt by the sec­re­tary gen­er­al of the Ma­ha Sab­ha, Sat Ma­haraj, to in­flu­ence them to vote for Ma­habir.

As gov­ern­ment min­is­ter, Warn­er must have im­pressed the UNC mem­ber­ship with the sev­er­al ac­tions he has ini­ti­at­ed to spread gov­ern­ment in­fra­struc­ture out­side of Port-of-Spain and in­to places such as Ch­agua­nas. In do­ing so, Warn­er must have been seen to be re­bal­anc­ing what the UNC con­sid­ers to have been decades of ne­glect and dis­crim­i­na­tion against towns and vil­lages in which In­do-Trinidad pre­dom­i­nates.

The UNC sup­port base has al­so been will­ing to re­main faith­ful to Warn­er, notwith­stand­ing the moun­tain of al­le­ga­tions made against him dur­ing the decades that he has held very se­nior po­si­tions in the world foot­ball body, Fi­fa. As is well known, those al­le­ga­tions in­clude that he had worked in tan­dem with Mo­ham-med bin Ham­mam to per­suade the Caribbean Foot­ball Union mem­bers, con­trary to Fi­fa reg­u­la­tions, to vote against Fi­fa pres­i­dent, Sepp Blat­ter.

His sup­port base with­in the UNC has ob­vi­ous­ly tak­en the de­ci­sion that what­ev­er Warn­er is al­leged to have done in his Fi­fa po­si­tions had no re­la­tion to them and their wel­fare. And they had the guid­ance of their po­lit­i­cal leader and prime min­is­ter as she adopt­ed a sim­i­lar po­si­tion-that was per­haps an un­wit­ting pro­vi­sion of an en­dorse­ment of Warn­er as be­ing fit to hold high of­fice with­in par­ty and gov­ern­ment.

So whether or not mem­bers of the core lead­er­ship of the par­ty and Gov­ern­ment may wish to rid them­selves of Warn­er, the elec­tion re­sults have sig­nalled to them that they have to live with him. Notwith­stand­ing that re­al­i­ty, there are un­doubt­ed­ly those who are still hop­ing for some ex­ter­nal dis­as­ter to crip­ple Warn­er-have him fall on his sword, per­haps-as a means of get­ting rid of him.

But with a gen­er­al elec­tion sched­uled to be con­test­ed in two and a half years, the UNC's po­lit­i­cal lead­er­ship has the choice of mak­ing-up with Jack or run the po­lit­i­cal risk of not hav­ing his cam­paign­ing abil­i­ty and his re­sources. Fact is, hard­core UNC has not been able to win with­out the or­gan­i­sa­tion­al cam­paign sup­port of the likes of Warn­er, Ramesh Ma­haraj and the coali­tion of par­ties which came to­geth­er in 2010.

Warn­er, on the oth­er hand, has open­ly ex­pressed his sup­port and be­lief in the par­ty and the Prime Min­is­ter; he can­not be seen to be go­ing back on that com­mit­ment. The very poor vot­er turnout, es­ti­mat­ed at 20 per cent and the glar­ing in­ad­e­qua­cies of the elec­toral sys­tem are not sur­pris­ing. They are in­dica­tive of the na­ture of the UNC: a po­lit­i­cal base or­gan­ised to sup­port a max­i­mum leader and to sub­serve the in­ter­est of a tribe.

Warn­er's ever­last­ing con­tri­bu­tion to the UNC and to the po­lit­i­cal par­ty cul­ture would be if he con­ceives of the val­ue of mov­ing the UNC be­yond the mes­sian­ic lead­er­ship mod­el, which gives pow­er to a leader and an in­ner cir­cle who ma­nip­u­late the sup­port base for their ben­e­fit. That is sure­ly one way to slay the drag­on of race-based pol­i­tics.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored